Tesla's response to me leaking info about the P100D?

[sandpiper]

The real telling part is Musk's response to this. If wk gives it a day or two, I expect he'll find all the updates are available again, and he may even get some sort of apology from Tesla (though Musk's tweet certainly qualifies as that, IMHO).

Oh, I'm not so sure about that. The information that "there is something good in the code" is out there now and I can assure you that others are trying to find it. And Tesla knows it. EM may be be understanding and at some level appreciative. But I am sure that he is absolutely P'D off that this has come out. And he is going to make sure it is rectified before something else gets exposed. I would not be surprised if NONE of us see any updates for a bit. I am certain that there are some very high pressure meetings at Tesla right now. And I am sure that they are trying to:

a) Determine what else can be divined from the current publicly available code.
b) Determine if there is a way to strip most of worst of the "at-risk" information and push an update to remove it.
c) Delay any new releases until they've confirmed that they've protected themselves via a new firmware release process.

And I'm sure that they're looking at the marketing/sales data with a lot of trepidation to determine what actions are required if there is any evidence of Osborning. Tesla is not like GM. They can't just shut down the line for a couple of months; they need the cash flow.

Owning a Tesla is a great experience... and entertaining as well.

 

[Auzie]

...................

My college age daughter believes this is actually guerrilla-war marketing by Tesla. The plant was intentional, and put there with the knowledge someone would find it. And the ninja attack response only expands the on-line buzz. Free advertising for the new model. Maybe Jason's being used in a great marketing conspiracy!

That is the first thought I had when I saw this story. It makes sense.

Given the very small amount of written contract that exists between Tesla and its customers, it's not at all clear to me that a forced downgrade is a violation of any law. "Sabotage" probably would be (although I'm not a lawyer and can't cite what law it would violate) but "downgrade to a lower firmware revision while leaving the car completely operable" isn't sabotage, or at least you might have a hard time convincing a judge of it.

Not that I think it was a good or smart move, it wasn't. The Elon tweet makes it all the more interesting, I'm going to have to buy more popcorn.

I find Elon's response interesting as well. I would be surprised if the downgrade attempt was done without his knowledge. His tweet (the exact wording of it) would be consistent with him being informed on the issue and letting his team deal with the issue the way they see fit.

I'm sure Volkswagen could use his services :smile:

I'm wondering if Elon's Tweet was picked somewhere in Tesla. He tends to micromanage things, from what I read. So either Jason will be left alone or the dreaded caravan of black model X-es will finally show up...

Yup! Tesla's software team better react instantly or they can go look for new jobs tomorrow. Elon grinds through people like that.

My view is that many here underestimate Tesla team and overestimate the extent of Elon's micromanaging his team. Perhaps Elon is well informed, perhaps he gets involved in critical decisions, but I doubt he will start sacking people over this, especially if he was informed on the issue, which I believe he was.

I would be surprised if attempted downgrade was a knee jerk reaction. My expectation is that the Tesla team mapped out the road ahead regarding this issue.

 

[Rebel44]

Well, once Tesla decided to distribute their secrets to buyers of their products it really stopped being their secrets.

A positive outcome is likely that Tesla will review their procedures regarding firmware versioning and distribution - and hopefully also what kind of staff is allowed to directly interfere with products already sold.

I agree.

 

[sandpiper]

Erring on the side of screwing a customer, or making it it easy to screw a customer, is a strange decision.

Yes, but it's very human. I've had employees do worse and dumber things. And I've done lots of dumb things myself that I thought better of later.

 

[Drivin]

Originally Posted by jgs

Given the very small amount of written contract that exists between Tesla and its customers, it's not at all clear to me that a forced downgrade is a violation of any law. "Sabotage" probably would be (although I'm not a lawyer and can't cite what law it would violate) but "downgrade to a lower firmware revision while leaving the car completely operable" isn't sabotage, or at least you might have a hard time convincing a judge of it.

Maybe the dividing line is that this was done to an individual (vs. a mass downgrade) and would be argued it was retaliatory.

 

[bhzmark]

Speculation: there is more info in 13.77 that they don't want revealed and they want to leap frog Wk over that into 14.nn which will be out shortly. Probably 13.77 hasn't been rolled out to everyone and they are probably stopping it until they get the more secure 14.nn ready to go. They are probably working around the clock. And not knowing that Wk already saved 13.77 , they understandably tried to just have him wait until 14. ? Just guessing. I don't think anyone at Tesla is evil. It's just a little cat and mouse game that they need to play with their more sophisticated customers.

Or it is smart (or accidental -- lets make lemonade) guerilla war marketing.

 

[sandpiper]

Speculation: there is more info in 13.77 that they don't want revealed and they want to leap frog Wk over that into 14.nn which will be out shortly. Probably 13.77 hasn't been rolled out to everyone and they are probably stopping it until they get the more secure 14.nn ready to go. They are probably working around the clock. And not knowing that Wk already saved 13.77 , they understandably tried to just have him wait until 14. ? Just guessing. I don't think anyone at Tesla is evil. It's just a little cat and mouse game that they need to play with their more sophisticated customers.

Certainly plausible. Sometimes you act now and deal with the consequences later.

 

[Bet TSLA]

It's pretty much obvious to everybody that Tesla can access and change the firmware on their cars. While you own your car, I don't think you own the firmware in any real sense. So if Tesla wants to upgrade, downgrade, or not change your firmware ever again I don't think there's much you can complain about -- it's theirs to operate the way they think best. You really don't have any rights to any particular version.

In fact, I don't think it would be unreasonable for Tesla to require some sort of heartbeat (regular connection to the mothership) in order to keep the vehicle functioning. That would mean that if somebody refused connection of any sort then their car would stop working. I think Tesla could get away with requiring this for safety reasons. If you don't like the idea, don't buy the car. Safety first!

Not that I'm particularly in favor of this sort of authoritarian approach on the part of Tesla. But I find it pretty amusing how people are posturing about their rights when they really have none. I suppose you might argue you have the right to the firmware that was originally delivered with your car, but beyond that....

 

[sandpiper]

In fact, I don't think it would be unreasonable for Tesla to require some sort of heartbeat (regular connection to the mothership) in order to keep the vehicle functioning. That would mean that if somebody refused connection of any sort then their car would stop working. I think Tesla could get away with requiring this for safety reasons. If you don't like the idea, don't buy the car. Safety first!

Uhhh... no. I think that would be completely unreasonable - and possibly illegal. You're buying a car and with that comes the right to use it.

 

[sillydriver]

Oh, I'm not so sure about that. The information that "there is something good in the code" is out there now and I can assure you that others are trying to find it. And Tesla knows it. EM may be be understanding and at some level appreciative. But I am sure that he is absolutely P'D off that this has come out. And he is going to make sure it is rectified before something else gets exposed. I would not be surprised if NONE of us see any updates for a bit. I am certain that there are some very high pressure meetings at Tesla right now. And I am sure that they are trying to:

a) Determine what else can be divined from the current publicly available code.
b) Determine if there is a way to strip most of worst of the "at-risk" information and push an update to remove it.
c) Delay any new releases until they've confirmed that they've protected themselves via a new firmware release process.

And I'm sure that they're looking at the marketing/sales data with a lot of trepidation to determine what actions are required if there is any evidence of Osborning. Tesla is not like GM. They can't just shut down the line for a couple of months; they need the cash flow.

Owning a Tesla is a great experience... and entertaining as well.

Good comment. I hope they have their act together enough to have the meetings you are predicting.

 

[wk057]

It's pretty much obvious to everybody that Tesla can access and change the firmware on their cars. While you own your car, I don't think you own the firmware in any real sense. So if Tesla wants to upgrade, downgrade, or not change your firmware ever again I don't think there's much you can complain about -- it's theirs to operate the way they think best. You really don't have any rights to any particular version.

In fact, I don't think it would be unreasonable for Tesla to require some sort of heartbeat (regular connection to the mothership) in order to keep the vehicle functioning. That would mean that if somebody refused connection of any sort then their car would stop working. I think Tesla could get away with requiring this for safety reasons. If you don't like the idea, don't buy the car. Safety first!

Not that I'm particularly in favor of this sort of authoritarian approach on the part of Tesla. But I find it pretty amusing how people are posturing about their rights when they really have none. I suppose you might argue you have the right to the firmware that was originally delivered with your car, but beyond that....

lol.

So basically, you want Tesla to own and control your car. Gotcha.

Unfortunately, that's not how the world actually works. *I* own and control *my* car. If I tell Tesla they're not allowed to downgrade the firmware, well, sorry for you Tesla, you're not allowed to downgrade the firmware. It's my property, end of discussion.

If Tesla refuses to allow my car to receive the same OTA updates as anyone else, then they're effectively reducing the value of my property by selecting to not provide this to my car while they provide it to other customers. Car was advertised as having OTA updates, especially ones relating to key features that were paid for (re: autopilot). Sorry, it can certainly be argued that Tesla is obligated to send the same OTA updates that everyone else gets as was advertised when I bought the vehicle.

 

[jerry33]

A company being vindictive and punitive because a customer did something they didn't like is not a good idea. Especially since this was sloppy programming on their part... This is 2016, not 1950.

Agreed, but the music and movie industries do it all the time.

 

[Drivin]

You really don't have any rights to any particular version.

You have the rights to a functional car since that is what you paid for.

That would mean that if somebody refused connection of any sort then their car would stop working.

See previous comment.

I think Tesla could get away with requiring this for safety reasons.

If they are disabling your car for "safety" reasons, then they have to give you a no cost, no hassle way of re-enabling it...oh, and in court, they probably would need to show that there was an actual safety problem and they fairly applied this to everyone, not just someone you don't like.

Not that I'm particularly in favor of this sort of authoritarian approach on the part of Tesla.

Well, then maybe you shouldn't try to excuse the behavior like you tried in your post by claiming that they can disable your car if they can't communicate with it. LOL...

"I really hate authoritarian actions...except for the type of authoritarian actions I like". That is how authoritarians win! LOL.

- - - Updated - - -

Agreed, but the music and movie industries do it all the time.

1. I thought Tesla was trying to be different?
2. The comparison is bad if you are referring to file "sharing". Or are you referring to something else?

 

[sandpiper]

If Tesla refuses to allow my car to receive the same OTA updates as anyone else, then they're effectively reducing the value of my property by selecting to not provide this to my car while they provide it to other customers. Car was advertised as having OTA updates, especially ones relating to key features that were paid for (re: autopilot). Sorry, it can certainly be argued that Tesla is obligated to send the same OTA updates that everyone else gets as was advertised when I bought the vehicle.

In my mind there is zero chance that they would do this. That would be incredibly stupid. And Tesla, as a company, is not stupid.

You've seen the code. Would if be fairly easy to segregate the data associated with future products in a manner that would allow them to hold back any sensitive information from public releases? Or would that be a major rewrite?

 

[wk057]

In my mind there is zero chance that they would do this. That would be incredibly stupid. And Tesla, as a company, is not stupid.

You've seen the code. Would if be fairly easy to segregate the data associated with future products in a manner that would allow them to hold back any sensitive information from public releases? Or would that be a major rewrite?

I haven't seen the source code, so, obviously just speculating based on what I can see.

Some things, sure... should be a piece of cake to sanitize. Others I'm not so sure.

 

[jerry33]

1. I thought Tesla was trying to be different?
2. The comparison is bad if you are referring to file "sharing". Or are you referring to something else?

1. I guess not that different.
2. File sharing, fan videos posted on youtube, etc. Before you say "sharing is stealing", bear in mind that those who share generally have very low discretionary income (mostly because they are students). So if you have $20 per month for entertainment, that's all you're going to spend. All prosecuting does is make enemies when you could be making future customers when their income levels increase. Of course, shortsightedness is the bane of Corporate America and is so deeply engrained it's probably impossible to get rid of. And yes, there will always be a few abusers, but there will be fewer abusers if you haven't gone out of your way to make enemies.

Of course, pirating and selling the pirated copies for profit is another story. That's always been illegal as well it should be.

Personally I purchase far less music than I did before the industry started prosecuting its customers.

 

[tom66]

This P100D leak would have been very easy to avoid for Tesla.

Simply don't include P100D assets until after the announcement. The cars aren't going to ship for a good month or two after that, so that's plenty of time to get the updates ready for the cars that do roll off the production line.

I am honestly surprised they made this mistake, you'd think they would know better especially given the very public posts on here from several members documenting fully that they have rooted their vehicles and have access to the unencrypted firmware images.

 

[JeffS]

Fascinating thread. I had equal parts SMH Tesla and SMH OP and his flock. 99.9% of the tech discussion was over my head...as is the case with 99.8% of all tech discussions. But I have to think Musk knew that an individual with mad skills would eventually find his/her way into the car. Surprised they bury information in the code like this. Their bad. Conversely, I would think starting a war with Musk would be 99.3% crazy, with the remaining .7% reserved for the super-rich. A war requires resources. Most people don't have them. Musk does. And what's the end game anyway?

SMH on both sides. Super-interesting thread.

 

[GHammer]

Not sure it's intentional, but my wings have been clipped on forums.teslamotors.com. Attempting to log in on the main forum page just returns to that page as if nothing was entered for user ID and password. I have an "alternate" account that gets me in and able to post, but not to see or create private threads.

I've been pretty vocal about the ESA and some recent service center issues. Is this intentional on the part of Tesla? Dunno. Multiple browsers and devices, same result.

Same thing is happening to me and there is no reason TMC would want to ban me, appears to be a forum bug.

 

[Super_Popular]

Must be something major for them to force a downgrade on you

Not really, Tesla gets pissy over the smallest things.